Culture is defined by the people who can move economies. Only what sticks is selected by the people who operate in those economies.

Luther and Hitler didn't change the culture of their people so those are false examples. The businessmen of the spice trade changed the culture of the German people leading to Luther's time. More recently, it was the Americans who changed German culture.

"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."

Grab a book on the history of the Reformation, you can't conjure up grass-roots movements any more than you can dismiss the effects of the Bible being translated into German, or the effects of moveable type. Tapping into a disgruntled mass' sensibilities over things like indulgences, etc., doesn't amount to fooling people.

The significance is that the people of Luther's time had no power to do anything except in the cities. Yes, it is significant that he put his theses in a city, but the people didn't take the initiative. The educated class did. The revolution came from the top-down. Luther, himself, was a member of the upper class...

"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."

The significance is that the people of Luther's time had no power to do anything except in the cities. Yes, it is significant that he put his theses in a city, but the people didn't take the initiative. The educated class did. The revolution came from the top-down. Luther, himself, was a member of the upper class...

Top-down as in leadership, not control. The serious problems with the Roman church had been brewing for more than 150 years. Luther did not beguile anyone into flipping out and starting several new denominations. He basically said what everyone was thinking -- and in the 95 thesis the populace at large found its tipping point. The same goes for Lenin -- almost an exact parallel.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

No, inventing Jesus, at least from the written records --- it's just too much to ask. It'd would have to be genius on an unprecedented scale; Idiot savantness to the umpteenth power.

unless the story of Jesus already existed in other cultures and it was developed? Like by those Educated Jews displaced by war - who had been absorbed into Greek culture and had been studying in Alexandria - say around 50BC

unless the story of Jesus already existed in other cultures and it was developed? Like by those Educated Jews displaced by war - who had been absorbed into Greek culture and had been studying in Alexandria - say around 50BC

Ha! I been reading on Greek Culture, don't get me started!

Seriously, they would have needed a braintrust just to get all the prophetic references in Matthew to jibe with the other three gospels (and the OT), it would demand near-clairvoyance.

(also, I'm about to crack another Boddingtons, any advice or warnings?)

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

One other thing I thought about last night, MarcUK -- that whole noble lie thing can only work in a materialistic framework; which is why it was a big part of the 20th century totalitarian regimes. It's not part of a Christian framework, though.

Since we are personalities there is no one crushing political formula, or bureaucratic algorithm that will order the disorder. We aren't just uncorrelated problems that need a catalyst, we're moral creatures that only work well together (under God) with a moral solution.

So yes, as in an atheistic panacea like the killing fields, or Stalin's purges, or a Great Leap Forward, but no, not for a Moral culture.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

One other thing I thought about last night, MarcUK -- that whole noble lie thing can only work in a materialistic framework; which is why it was a big part of the 20th century totalitarian regimes. It's not part of a Christian framework, though.

Since we are personalities there is no one crushing political formula, or bureaucratic algorithm that will order the disorder. We aren't just uncorrelated problems that need a catalyst, we're moral creatures that only work well together (under God) with a moral solution.

So yes, as in an atheistic panacea like the killing fields, or Stalin's purges, or a Great Leap Forward, but no, not for a Moral culture.

...you're just a bunch of chemicals reacting haphazardly on top of your neck, morals don't really exist, 'personality' is an accident or a complete illusion and you're an animal like every other animal on the planet only with some pretty entrenched ideas derived from your 'firmware'.

One other thing I thought about last night, MarcUK -- that whole noble lie thing can only work in a materialistic framework; which is why it was a big part of the 20th century totalitarian regimes. It's not part of a Christian framework, though.

Since we are personalities there is no one crushing political formula, or bureaucratic algorithm that will order the disorder. We aren't just uncorrelated problems that need a catalyst, we're moral creatures that only work well together (under God) with a moral solution.

So yes, as in an atheistic panacea like the killing fields, or Stalin's purges, or a Great Leap Forward, but no, not for a Moral culture.

pop a couple of boddingtons, i think I understood you better last night.

...you're just a bunch of chemicals reacting haphazardly on top of your neck, morals don't really exist, 'personality' is an accident or a complete illusion and you're an animal like every other animal on the planet only with some pretty entrenched ideas derived from your 'firmware'.

Thank you, but can I get an upgrade?

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Let me try to construct on the fly the argument I was going to make with the original post.

Noble Lies. A necessary evil. There are stupid idiotic people in the world. Fact. There are people who cant function for themselves and need a noble lie to activate them to do something. They're not doing it for this life, but they're doing it for the promise of a better life when they're dead.

Plato realised this. On the surface, a noble lie - to mere average people if they discover it will make them angry, and disgusted with discovering the lie. They then have to make a choice. Accept that the things they believed were a lie and seek out new pastures, or deny there was ever a lie and continue to be subjected to it.

In Plato's world, society wouldn't function if everyone knew the truth. - There would be those who accepted the truth, but who had not become wise. A Stupid person knowing the truth is arguably more dangerous than a smart person who doesn't know.

Therefore a noble lie must be constructed, so that everyone is controlled for their own benefit and for society as a whole until they have become wise enough to handle the revealed truth in its plain unadulterated form, without becoming angry or destructive, or using the truth within the lie for selfish benefit.

A noble lie therefor, while a disgraceful concept, is actually the best way to stop society harming or destructing itself. Those who are smart and wise enough, will eventually go on to discover the lie, but by the time they have, they will have realised the reason why the lie needs to be maintained.

Therefore this lie, is still maintained by the wise people who have discovered its true nature. It is an act of compassion, protecting society from the people who would otherwise degenerate it of their own accord, and protecting society from people who knew the nature of the lie, but were not wise enough to realise that it was the only way for society to maintain itself.

Which is one way of looking at it through a certain filter.

But what happens when - Plato being wise, knew what society had to be told to keep it functioning. There would be by default, people who knew the nature of the lie and were wise. These were the people at the top - and within themselves they freely and openenly could discuss the lie, knowing that they were wise enough to understand the implications of the lie and its consequences. These were the truly free people. They maintained the lie, for the benefit of everyone.

There were people who suspected the lie, but were not wise enough to conduct themselves if the true nature of the lie, were disclosed to them, so the Guardians of the lie, maintained at all times that the lie was true - because these people could go either way - loose cannons.

There were people who never suspected the lie, and were happy to maintain themselves by being controlled by it. They would never be capable of handling the nature of the lie as it would make them angry and it was best that it was never disclosed to them.

And there were people who never suspeded the lie, and were willfully acting within its boudaries. Infact they positively wanted to be lied too.

Now the problem is, that you have a pyramid here that functions only when the people at the top are aware of the lie, why it is necessary, and why it must be maintained, and the essential part of being at the top of the pyramid, is that you can know the nature of the lie and still function as required with genuine compassion for the rest of the group. ie you cannot be corrupted by the revelation the lie discloses. Naturally, the people at the top are easily outnumbered by the lower classes, but they maintain their position by 1) Maintaining the lie and 2) eing repected by people lower in the pyramid to act on their best intentions with the wisdom they display.

I think eventually, this system is doomed to failure.

As society gets bigger and bigger, there are less and less people at the top of the pyramid to nurture society compared to the rabble at the bottom. Eventually, the voice of the rabble becomes strong, and will force its way into positions at the top, where they will learn the nature of the lie, but they wouldn't have the wisdom - so in effect they become corrupted by it, and see that they can use the lie to enslave and control the lower classes of society for personal gain, and not the benefit of society.

I don't know what else to say, we are all personalities, not some sort of jigsaw puzzle that just needs the right policy to make us all fit in a mechanical sort of way. There is a moral solution to us all working together, but since we live in a fallen world that is going to involve some pain and suffering, that can never be engineered away.

The American 'war on poverty' or 'war on drugs,' 'war on ter..., ...ehem... , Prohibition, all come to mind. There is only so much social engineering that is going to 'take' on a particular culture until you have to hire a secret police and start whisking people off to Lubyanka.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...